Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May/Jun;31(3):239-247.
doi: 10.11607/ijp.5563.

Do Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Color-Vision Deficiencies Influence Shade-Matching Ability?

Do Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Color-Vision Deficiencies Influence Shade-Matching Ability?

Boštjan Pohlen et al. Int J Prosthodont. 2018 May/Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of color-vision deficiencies and type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) on visual shade-matching ability.

Materials and methods: Four groups of participants were investigated: a control group (n = 68); a group with protanomalia (n = 10); a group with deuteranomalia (n = 19); and a group with type 1 DM (n = 13). Color vision was evaluated monocularly using the Ishihara test, Farnsworth-Munsell 100 hue (FM100H) test, Hardy Rand Rittler (HRR) test, and with an HMC Anomaloskop MR (Rayleigh and Moreland tests). The final exam was on a Toothguide Training Box (TTB) and consisted of 15 lightness-chroma-hue tasks. The color difference (ΔE*ab) and the shade-matching score (ΣΔE*ab) were computed, and the correct lightness (L*), chroma (C*), and hue (h*) selections were counted. The means and standard deviations for the ΣΔE*ab, ΔE*ab, L*, C*, h*, Ishihara, HRR, FM100H, and Rayleigh and Moreland tests were calculated. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Bonferroni test were used for statistical analyses and a comparison of means (α = .05). The data analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0 for Windows (IBM).

Results: The control group selected the shade tab on the TTB significantly better (ΣΔE*ab = 31.57 ± 13.50) than the group with protanomalia (ΣΔE*ab = 55.50 ± 12.36; P < .0001) and the group with deuteranomalia (ΣΔE*ab = 59.18 ± 16.35; P < .0001), but not significantly better than the group with type 1 DM (ΣΔE*ab = 39.43 ± 11.46; P = .368). The group with type 1 DM selected the shade tab on the TTB significantly better than the group with protanomalia (P = .038) and the group with deuteranomalia (P < .0001).

Conclusion: Participants with color-vision deficiencies are less accurate at shade matching than the control group and the group with type 1 DM.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources